Seema. vs State of H.P.

Petitioner has approached this Court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in case FIR No. 17/18, registered under Sections 363, and

366A IPC on 30.1.2018 in Police Station, Theog, District Shimla, H.P., apprehending her arrested in the said case.

Fresh status report stands filed and record has also been produced.

On 29.1.2018 complainant Naresh Kumar approached the Police Station Theog by submitting a written complaint stating therein that his 17

years old daughter was missing from house and suspected that Suresh Kumar had kidnapped his daughter, as earlier also he had tried to kidnap

her, but the said incident was averted by them by counseling their daughter. It was also stated that as per information received, Suresh Kumar had

kidnapped his daughter in vehicle of his brother-in-law Sanjay who, on inquiry, had only disclosed that Suresh Kumar had borrowed his vehicle at

about 4:00 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes P.M. on the pretext of some urgent work.

Involvement of Sanjay (brother-inlaw of Suresh Kumar) in the incident was also suspected.

As per police report on 30.1.2018 victim alongwith Suresh Kumar appeared in the Police Station, whereafter on her medical examination, it

was opined by the doctor that possibility of sexual abuse could not be ruled out. On 2.2.2018 statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was

recorded, wherein she stated that she was violated forcibly and she was kidnapped on 28.1.2018 and taken towards Sirmour in a vehicle brought

by Suresh Kumar whose sister Seema (petitioner) and her husband Sanjay were also stated to be responsible for her kidnapping as Suresh Kumar

had kidnapped her in vehicle of husband of petitioner. On the basis of statement of victim, Sanjay Kumar alias Sanjeev was arrested on 3.2.2018.

Apprehending her arrest, petitioner filed this present petition.

In the initial complaint, filed by father of victim on 29.1.2018, there is no allegation against the present petitioner. It is only in the statement under

Section 164 Cr.P.C. made by victim; involvement of petitioner in her kidnapping was mentioned by stating therein that Sanjeev and Seema

(petitioner) were behind her kidnapping. At this stage, there is nothing on record to reflect active involvement of the petitioner in kidnapping of

victim. On the contrary father of victim had himself stated in his statement made at the first instance that on earlier occasion also such an incident

was averted by them wisely by counseling their daughter and there is no allegation qua the involvement of Sanjeev or Seema (petitioner) in that

incident. In the instant incident, the only link between petitioner with commission of offence is that vehicle belonging to her husband was borrowed

by her brother Suresh Kumar for traveling with victim. In FIR itself, father of victim had stated that Sanjay alias Sanjeev had informed him about

borrowing of his vehicle by Suresh Kumar. Further, it is not the case of prosecution that victim was recovered by the police or her parents, but in

present case victim along with main accused Suresh Kumar had appeared in the Police Station themselves at their own. Accused Suresh Kumar

arrested by the police is in judicial custody and petitioner has joined the investigation and as per status report nothing is to be recovered from her

and there is nothing on record to reflect that her further interrogation much less custodial interrogation is required. Though veracity of entire

evidence is to be appreciated by the trial Court on completion of trial, however, prima facie there is no convincing material on record warranting

rejection of bail application of petitioner rather, in my opinion, it is a fit case for grant of bail.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 17 of 2018, dated 30.1.2018,

registered at police Station Theog, Tehsil and District Shimla, H.P. under Sections 363 and 366A of I.P.C, on his furnishing personal bond in the

sum of `50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Theog, District Shimla, H.P., within a

period of two weeks, with the following conditions:-

(i) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so

as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(ii) that the petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or threaten the witnesses;

(iii) that the petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required.

(iv) that the petitioner shall not misuse her liberty in any manner.

Learned Judicial Magistrate is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No.HHC.VIG./Misc.

Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.03.2013.

Any observation made hereinabove shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the

matter uninfluenced by any observation made hereinabove. Petition stands disposed of. Copy Dasti.